Reply to Topic
Showgirls
When a movie is panned universally by critics, in most cases there’s a simple answer. The movie is poor. Showgirls, for those who are not aware, was universally panned at the time of its release in 1995. It currently sits on a 19% rottentomatoes rating and is infamous for a “so bad, its good” mock status.
The film starts abruptly, we follow Nomi, the main character, hitchhiking her way to Las Vegas where she hopes to begin a dancing career. She is robbed and soon after befriended by Molly whom she moves in with. Nomi finds work as a stripper and through various character interactions and physical displays of dancing and erotic skillsets she becomes a “prestigious” Las Vegas showgirl.
Although the story is relatively linear, the ferocity and pace of both Nomi and the film itself engage the senses. It is a transfixing experience as the characters move back and forth, off centre character are seen reacting to dialogue, eavesdropping, getting dressed, ect. This type of subtle attention to detail in the background of shots is something I haven’t seen in films today and it is missed.
The dialogue and general acting performances are divisive. One could see an exaggerated take on the entertainment industry yet perhaps it is more grounded and mirrors the bizarre reality that would be the Vegas sex work industry. Of course this is a film and its purpose is to entertain and it does so with flares of drama and spectacle.
Nomi is a revelation. Towards the last quarter of the film I was struck with the sense that, even though I had been following this character from the first scene, I didn’t know who she was nor could I predict how she would behave. What are her moral’s? What’s her mental state? Her history is not revealed until the end scenes and this effectively, among other considerations, such as erratic sexual and violent behaviour, makes her a mystery. You have been watching Nomi for the first hour and a half or so and you don’t know her and very likely you may not like her. Although there is a resolution, the mystery that is Nomi coupled with her, at times obnoxious behaviour, make for captivating viewing.
The characters she interacts with are also as fallible as she is. Some are weak willed, narcissistic and perverse. Some project ugliness that is redeemed or in some cases is not. Again these characters seemed to be grounded in a bizarre reality that may or may not be real life exposed to its bone. What I mean by this is that there’s a truth to the behaviour, whether it’s done with too much exaggeration is debatable. We know people can and do behave in this manner in real life.
Was the movie panned because it exposed the reality of certain sections of western society? Is the sexual display on show (a bam in your face from the onset) too much for the older generation of males and females who reviewed and watched this film? Nomi is a master of sexual manipulation. Was that too much for the males and females of the day. Is it something to be shunned? The film is neither shunning or glorifying it, it is merely shinning a bright flashlight on it. The camera does not pan away, it shows you the raw sex and nakedness. We see it all and we can make our own judgements.
In most cases when a movie is critically panned there’s a simple answer. Showgirls I believe is the exception. The answer is complex, multifaceted. The film, over 20 years, feels fresh, provocative and I bet to this day, divisive. Nevertheless, it is worth revisiting. Maybe the world wasn’t ready for Nomi in 1995 and maybe we still don’t want to accept her but she is still entertaining some.
Larry
4 out of 5 Stars
When a movie is panned universally by critics, in most cases there’s a simple answer. The movie is poor. Showgirls, for those who are not aware, was universally panned at the time of its release in 1995. It currently sits on a 19% rottentomatoes rating and is infamous for a “so bad, its good” mock status.
The film starts abruptly, we follow Nomi, the main character, hitchhiking her way to Las Vegas where she hopes to begin a dancing career. She is robbed and soon after befriended by Molly whom she moves in with. Nomi finds work as a stripper and through various character interactions and physical displays of dancing and erotic skillsets she becomes a “prestigious” Las Vegas showgirl.
Although the story is relatively linear, the ferocity and pace of both Nomi and the film itself engage the senses. It is a transfixing experience as the characters move back and forth, off centre character are seen reacting to dialogue, eavesdropping, getting dressed, ect. This type of subtle attention to detail in the background of shots is something I haven’t seen in films today and it is missed.
The dialogue and general acting performances are divisive. One could see an exaggerated take on the entertainment industry yet perhaps it is more grounded and mirrors the bizarre reality that would be the Vegas sex work industry. Of course this is a film and its purpose is to entertain and it does so with flares of drama and spectacle.
Nomi is a revelation. Towards the last quarter of the film I was struck with the sense that, even though I had been following this character from the first scene, I didn’t know who she was nor could I predict how she would behave. What are her moral’s? What’s her mental state? Her history is not revealed until the end scenes and this effectively, among other considerations, such as erratic sexual and violent behaviour, makes her a mystery. You have been watching Nomi for the first hour and a half or so and you don’t know her and very likely you may not like her. Although there is a resolution, the mystery that is Nomi coupled with her, at times obnoxious behaviour, make for captivating viewing.
The characters she interacts with are also as fallible as she is. Some are weak willed, narcissistic and perverse. Some project ugliness that is redeemed or in some cases is not. Again these characters seemed to be grounded in a bizarre reality that may or may not be real life exposed to its bone. What I mean by this is that there’s a truth to the behaviour, whether it’s done with too much exaggeration is debatable. We know people can and do behave in this manner in real life.
Was the movie panned because it exposed the reality of certain sections of western society? Is the sexual display on show (a bam in your face from the onset) too much for the older generation of males and females who reviewed and watched this film? Nomi is a master of sexual manipulation. Was that too much for the males and females of the day. Is it something to be shunned? The film is neither shunning or glorifying it, it is merely shinning a bright flashlight on it. The camera does not pan away, it shows you the raw sex and nakedness. We see it all and we can make our own judgements.
In most cases when a movie is critically panned there’s a simple answer. Showgirls I believe is the exception. The answer is complex, multifaceted. The film, over 20 years, feels fresh, provocative and I bet to this day, divisive. Nevertheless, it is worth revisiting. Maybe the world wasn’t ready for Nomi in 1995 and maybe we still don’t want to accept her but she is still entertaining some.
Larry
4 out of 5 Stars
